KrebsonSecurity is reporting that the online "cheating" site AshleyMadison.com (and other sites run by the Avid Life Media group) has been hacked with user information compromised by a group called the Impact Team.
The group is threatening to release all data online as a result of alleged lies the ALM group told members unless the sites are entirely shut down.
"Full Delete netted ALM $1.7mm in revenue in 2014. It's also a complete lie," the hacking group wrote. "Users almost always pay with credit card; their purchase details are not removed as promised, and include real name and address, which is of course the most important information the users want removed."
AshleyMadison.com does offer a $20 "Full Delete" option for a users profile, as detailed in this ArsTechnica article from 2014. Obviously, this "Full Delete" is now useless, as the information is already (allegedly) in the hands of the hackers.
Is this a case of altruistic hacking or a possible case of revenge?
Related Stories
Multiple reports suggest that Impact Team has leaked around 9.6 to 10 gigabytes of data from the "cheating/affair website" Ashley Madison onto Tor sites (now available via BitTorrent). According to Ars Technica:
A 10-gigabyte file purportedly containing e-mails, member profiles, credit-card transactions and other sensitive Ashley Madison information became available as a BitTorrent download in the past few hours. Ars downloaded the massive file and it appeared to contain a trove of details taken from a clandestine dating site, but so far there is nothing definitively linking it to Ashley Madison. User data included e-mail addresses, profile descriptions, addresses provided by users, weight, and height. A separate file containing credit card transaction data didn't include full payment card numbers or billing addresses.
Rob Graham, CEO of Errata Security, said the dump also included user passwords that were cryptographically protected using the bcrypt hashing algorithm. That's among the most secure ways to store passwords, because bcrypt is extremely slow, a trait that requires crackers to devote vast amounts of time and computing resources. Still, it's highly likely a large percentage of the hashes will be cracked, given rampant use of weak passwords.
Ashley Madison officials have stopped short of confirming the published information was extracted from the breach.
"We have now learned that the individual or individuals responsible for this attack claim to have released more of the stolen data," they wrote in an e-mail to Ars. "We are actively monitoring and investigating this situation to determine the validity of any information posted online and will continue to devote significant resources to this effort. Furthermore, we will continue to put forth substantial efforts into removing any information unlawfully released to the public, as well as continuing to operate our business."
Previously: Adult 'Extracurricular Activity' Website AshleyMadison.com Hacked
According to security blogger Graham Cluley, some former members of the site are now receiving blackmail demands through the post. The letters ask for thousands of dollars and threaten to out former members if the lucre is not forthcoming.
Ever since the database of Ashley Madison users was displayed online, blackmailers have been quick to try and extort money from members. The swift exposure of high-profile casualties, like former director of the Family Research Council Josh Duggar, who resigned in disgrace after being shown to have multiple accounts with the website, showed there was money to be made.
After the database went online, at least one suicide was linked to the leak.
It later emerged that the whole website was something of a busted flush, with around one per cent of the people on there being women looking for affairs.
Previous Soylent Coverage:
Amazon and GoDaddy Sued for Hosting Leaked Ashley Madison Data
Infidelity Website Hack Leads to Suicides in Canada
Hackers Reportedly Leak Nearly 10 GB of Ashley Madison ("Cheating Site") Files
Adult 'Extracurricular Activity' Website AshleyMadison.com Hacked
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday July 20 2015, @05:54PM
And now they think the ideal way to deal with their infidelity is several federal felonies?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @06:03PM
Another case where both parties should fuck each other over into utter mutual destruction.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by takyon on Monday July 20 2015, @06:44PM
One party (the hackers) committed a crime, the other (adulterers and website) didn't.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Informative) by JNCF on Monday July 20 2015, @07:04PM
From TFA:
According to the hackers, although the “full delete” feature that Ashley Madison advertises promises “removal of site usage history and personally identifiable information from the site,” users’ purchase details — including real name and address — aren’t actually scrubbed.
“Full Delete netted ALM $1.7mm in revenue in 2014. It’s also a complete lie,” the hacking group wrote. “Users almost always pay with credit card; their purchase details are not removed as promised, and include real name and address, which is of course the most important information the users want removed.”
If this isn't a crime (IANAL) it certainly sounds like something that warrants their servers getting burned to the ground by an angry mob with pitchforks. If you say you're deleting somebody's data, delete it.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Monday July 20 2015, @07:26PM
I just deleted all your data from my records. Your credit card will now be charged the $200.000 you had agreed to pay for this service. For your safety and anonymity, you will not receive a duplicate of your receipt.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 21 2015, @12:07AM
Your credit card will now be charged the $200.000 you had agreed to pay for this service. For your safety and anonymity, you will not receive a duplicate of your receipt.
Won't work. Credit card companies will deny or reverse payment, if the business doesn't have proof of payment.
(Score: 4, Informative) by JNCF on Monday July 20 2015, @07:27PM
Also, I just looked at the AshleyMadison site to see if it has any clear warnings about a data breach. I didn't see any, but did see these claims:
Over 37,610,000 anonymous members!
Ashley Madison is the world's leading married dating service for discreet encounters
Trusted Security Award
100% DISCREET SERVICE
Seems like they're lying to their customers, and should update their site to say "0% DISCREET SERVICE" with much haste.
Really, people should stop trusting centralised websites with personal information that could damage them. That doesn't make it okay to lie to your customers about data security and sell them false promises for $20 a pop, though.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by tftp on Monday July 20 2015, @07:47PM
That doesn't make it okay to lie to your customers about data security and sell them false promises for $20 a pop, though.
If I were offered such a "full delete", I'd ask how exactly they are going to delete my data from hundreds of backup tapes that are stored in vaults of Iron Mountain and similar companies.
Today very little of what you volunteer to the Internet can be truly deleted. The cost of duplication is very small, and the need for duplication (backups, load sharing, hot standby) is high. Perhaps one of viable strategies here is not to delete the data, but to poison the data with wrong, misleading information, and to let it propagate through a good number of backup cycles. An active account will not prompt reaching for a backup; a deleted account is likely to be restored only from a recent backup (just before the deletion.) You'd have to be very important to force people to order a 3 years old backup tape and then try to restore it onto a system that may be too new to accept such an old data. Maybe the old tapes will be reused - and then you are completely safe.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @08:52PM
Easy per-user encrypted keys stored in a database with a sign in unlocking said key. They can back up all they want, but they are only getting the encrypted data. Secure delete on their end equals DELETE FROM userkeys WHERE username=$deleted_user;
(Score: 1) by tftp on Monday July 20 2015, @11:15PM
Zero-knowledge setups definitely exist; however their weakness is in fact that only the customer has the key, and only the customer can understand the data. This makes it usable only in narrowly defined cases. There are some new patents that describe how to do some limited processing on partially understood data, but it's not interesting to those Web sites. A company that stores c/c numbers when it is not permitted to do so will not be spending even a dime on safeguarding someone else's data. Plenty of those services are focused on fleecing the sheep.
(Score: 2) by JNCF on Monday July 20 2015, @09:08PM
You would be smart to question their "FULL DELETE" offer, obviously. Does the fact that a large number of users are more gullible/ignorant than you make it acceptable to lie to those users and sell them a service you can't deliver? Is it okay for me to launch a website that advertises a "FULL DELETE" of your NSA files for $20, and then doesn't actually do anything? I'd feel like kind of an asshole for doing something like that, a fraud even. The fact that people might actually fall for it wouldn't make me feel like less of an asshole.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Monday July 20 2015, @10:52PM
So, wait... this site is specifically for people to perform adultery, with other people wishing to perform adultery, all while being covert.... and on the Internet in a database?
I'm guessing that there does have to be a victim in here someplace deserving of some sympathy perhaps, but I'm going to need teams of people to find this person.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday July 21 2015, @01:05AM
Given the context of the article IANAL takes on a different meaning for me.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @07:42PM
Banks worldwide stole trillions of dollars from taxpayers...legally. Don't make it 'OK'.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Monday July 20 2015, @08:42PM
adultery is still illegal [wikipedia.org] in many US states. marriage is a contract, after all, and enforcing contracts is one of the responsibilities of government, otherwise there's no point to them.
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Monday July 20 2015, @08:59PM
https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2012/11/15/adultery-still-crime-states-including-mass/KiIPGRcFnAeT4CGmenFTKM/story.html [bostonglobe.com]
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t16c015.php [scstatehouse.gov]
Oral sex is also a felony in South Carolina.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by redbear762 on Monday July 20 2015, @09:55PM
Patraeus's career hasn't been harmed in any significant way except for a major black eye and known as a cheating asshole to just about everyone; hehas been called back to serve as a de facto consultant against ISIS.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday July 20 2015, @10:25PM
His career looked a lot worse back in 2012, when that article was written, and in early 2013 [wikipedia.org], when he took a visiting professor position at City University of New York for a $1 salary after the proposed $200,000 salary was slammed.
Since joining KKR Global Institute in May 2013 and getting the slap-on-the-wrist plea deal in March 2015, he has done very well for himself.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @10:36PM
Most people know better than to seek legal counsel on their marriages from a newspaper article.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday July 20 2015, @10:45PM
Most people are not prosecuted for committing adultery or engaging in oral sex.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by Nollij on Wednesday July 22 2015, @05:14AM
IANAL, but I suspect Lawrence v. Texas invalidated those laws.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hash14 on Monday July 20 2015, @10:53PM
This just goes to show how stupid moral laws are.
Do you honestly expect politicians to go on the public record for fair treatment of activities like adultery? They're certainly not worthy of felonies and prison sentences - but they are taboo, and no one wants to be seen doing anything to condone it, hence, they will never be repealed.
How about this for a rule: any law that hasn't been enforced in the previous 10 years must be explicitly renewed to stay enforceable. It might take a bit of creativity to enforce, but this mechanism definitely worked to its intended effect for the US surveillance laws.
(Score: 2) by penguinoid on Tuesday July 21 2015, @07:35AM
Maybe all laws, other than the Constitution, should go up for review every so often. If nothing else, that way politicians don't have to make the same thing illegal again just to show they oppose it. And they also can't bury their support for laws by going "oh well it passed nothing to be done about it anymore".
RIP Slashdot. Killed by greedy bastards.
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Wednesday July 22 2015, @12:51AM
> any law must be explicitly renewed every 10 years
FTFY
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @10:23PM
One party (the hackers) committed a crime, the other (adulterers and website) didn't.
One party did the right thing and the other didn't.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Monday July 20 2015, @06:04PM
The group is threatening to release all data online as a result of alleged lies the ALM group told members unless the sites are entirely shut down.
They're lying. $0? Whatever. If they really had the data they would be running their own "secure delete" for interested neocon politicians. Democrats are now assumed by default to be getting BJs from their interns but the R haven't gotten past that little hangup (maybe this will be the catalyst?). CEO type figures are in between.
Also, not just secure delete, but plenty of people would donate $$$ to add certain leaders to the list.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @06:22PM
> They're lying. $0? Whatever.
It sounds like you are discrediting their claim solely on your belief that people can have no other motivations than money.
As if no one who could hack that site might possibly hold a grudge for enabling someone to hurt them.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by zafiro17 on Monday July 20 2015, @06:53PM
All it takes is one or two talented hackers who have personally been betrayed by people they loved. Then to see something like Ashley Madison, encouraging people to go out and screw over people who trust them must seem unfathomably galling. It starts to look like a target. Not coincidentally, it's a target that is ideal for blackmail: it's full of probably wealthy people who have entrusted A.M. with very personal and private information and whose lives would be irretrievably wrecked if it got out. They would do probably ANYTHING to keep that secret in the box.
Personally, I think these hackers are being extremely courteous by asking for nothing other than the destruction of the website (sadly, its backers will just spawn a new site, since there's no killing the business model, and it looks like the business model was making them easy cash).
I'm happily married to a wife I trust totally. But I can guarantee you, if I found out she'd been sleeping around, just knowing there's a site out there saying "Go on, do it - fuck over guys like zafiro17 at our super awesome website service" would be like a steady roar of outrage slowly consuming my brain. So I totally get where these hackers are coming from, and commend them for their work.
In fact, as I play out this little fantasy, I think I would wait until they shut down the website, and then release the personal info ANYWAY. Just to be a dick. Not the credit card info, the awful, personal, sexual stuff. Those folks fucked up big time by joining that site. They shouldn't get away that easy.
Dad always thought laughter was the best medicine, which I guess is why several of us died of tuberculosis - Jack Handey
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @07:23PM
She's cheating on you, bro
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @07:35PM
How do you know that? You don't know their personal circumstances or details of their relationships and you can't safely make assumptions. As to the public release of personal / private information -- that is always disgusting.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday July 20 2015, @08:30PM
In fact, as I play out this little fantasy, I think I would wait until they shut down the website, and then release the personal info ANYWAY.
Either way, when this story broke I added a boatload of popcorn to the shopping list.
This could make the Apple breach look like a high school hallway tease.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by tathra on Monday July 20 2015, @08:51PM
except if your wife cheated, she's the one who cheated, not the website, and not the guy(s) she fucked. i really don't get the misdirected rage that occurs when a parter cheats - your partner is the one who betrayed your trust and lied to you, your partner is the one who fucked you over, so why is the rage never directed at the partner and always instead at the other person, the one who doesn't owe you any loyalty or trust? similarly, a website that allow cheaters to meet each other isn't the one allowing or encouraging them to cheat, your partner is the sole person responsible, its not like the website is the reason they cheated, your partner wouldn't even be looking at the website if they weren't already planning to cheat.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by LoRdTAW on Monday July 20 2015, @10:26PM
I think people have it backwards. My guess is the hackers are the people who were caught cheating. Why would a betrayed hacker be upset about retained data which exposed their lover's infidelity? Wouldn't the data retention be the reason they caught their s/o cheating which would be beneficial in a divorce case?
Here what happened:
-Hacker gets bored of s/o (it happens).
-goes on cheating site and creates profile.
-Either cheats or doesn't cheat, doesn't matter as long as you have a profile you are assumed guilty.
-Deletes profile thinking it would cover their tracks.
-Profile isn't actually deleted.
-significant other suspects cheating and snoops on email/apps/texts etc.
-Finds "deleted" profile.
-Files for divorce using profile as evidence in divorce case
-Cheaters life made a living legal hell.
-Cheating hacker gets pissed at website and here we are.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Tuesday July 21 2015, @01:26AM
It does seem a bit ironic--a lying, cheating spouse getting mad at a service that lied about something.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Tuesday July 21 2015, @08:09AM
i really don't get the misdirected rage that occurs when a parter cheats - your partner is the one who betrayed your trust and lied to you, your partner is the one who fucked you over, so why is the rage never directed at the partner and always instead at the other person, the one who doesn't owe you any loyalty or trust?
WTF!!!
What on earth makes you think its an 'either or' situation? WTF makes you think the rage is "never directed at the partner"? Cheating destroys relationships all the time, partners get tossed out, their belongings get destroyed, and they even get physically attacked over it all the time...in other words "rage is directed at the cheating partner" ALL THE TIME. Your assertion is patently absurd.
But there's plenty more rage to go around. For example the 'other person' knew what they were doing; they certainly don't get a free pass just because they don't owe me trust or loyalty; they knew they were participating in screwing me over even if they don't know me. We're not going to be friends after that... to say the least.
And a dating site like ashley madison? they want to make money out of creating a forum for people to screw their partner over, fuck em, there's going to be PLENTY of rage to spare when the partners that get fucked over find out to send rage some their way too.
People say monogamy is changing, open relationships are fine... whatever. That's not for me, but if you have that, that's fine. Its not actually cheating or a betrayal of trust if all partners are consenting to it after all. And those people don't need a site like ashley madison, because they don't need to hide it from their partners.
The only people who need ashley madison are those looking to screw someone over. Fuck them, Fuck the site, and Fuck everyone involved with it. Cleanse it with fire.
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Monday July 20 2015, @07:12PM
Why "neo"con? I think you're misusing the term. Neocons are people who want to turn conservative policy towards excessive geopolitical meddling and free market absolutism(and would you kindly ignore that those two are contradictions).
You're thinking of full on hyper-traditionalist regressives, who seem incapable of not engaging relatively tame sex acts they're sure are destroying America.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Alfred on Monday July 20 2015, @06:06PM
One of the rules states that there are no women on the internet, only men.
Men not being my thing I decided to steer clear of AM.
I have dodged another bullet with logic.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday July 20 2015, @06:43PM
That, plus the rule "nothing ever gets deleted on the Internet."
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by mtrycz on Monday July 20 2015, @07:57PM
...even if you pay 19$ for it.
In capitalist America, ads view YOU!
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday July 20 2015, @11:17PM
That's rather dumb. There's tons of women on the internet. What do you think at least half of Facebook's users are?
There just aren't any more than a tiny number of women on the sites that you frequent, such as this one.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Tuesday July 21 2015, @08:26AM
What do you think at least half of Facebook's users are?
Bots and accounts run by marketing companies?
sudo mod me up
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @06:07PM
Krebson Security ey? Nice name...
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday July 20 2015, @06:51PM
I capped "On" in my dupe submission, but that is how it is stylized in his logo.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bob_super on Monday July 20 2015, @06:14PM
"full delete" cannot exist under the law, as you need to keep records of the people for usually 3 years after you charge their credit card.
A full audit of these companies would be fun for the IRS auditors, for sure.
On a related note, an old saying proven once again true "it's better if he gets a prostitute rather than a mistress".
When is the US going to realize that regulated prostitution would solve a lot of "crime"?
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @06:45PM
> "full delete" cannot exist under the law, as you need to keep records of the people for usually 3 years after you charge their credit card.
Not true. There is no such law.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Monday July 20 2015, @07:31PM
"full delete" cannot exist under the law, as you need to keep records of the people for usually 3 years after you charge their credit card.
Not true. There is no such law.
Maybe not, but the information has to be kept as charges can be disputed (I suspect many of these are after being discovered by significant others), a minimum of 6 months in the US at least, and possibly longer in Europe.
(Score: 2) by arulatas on Monday July 20 2015, @08:40PM
Maybe keep them in an offline backup? Just saying.
----- 10 turns around
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @09:59PM
> Maybe not, but the information has to be kept as charges can be disputed
Kept by the payment processor, not the site. Which means, if the site did it right, there would be no way to go from the site's user list to the identity on the payment itself.
(1) Not a law
(2) Not even a requirement for refunds
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Tuesday July 21 2015, @06:10PM
> Maybe not, but the information has to be kept as charges can be disputed
Kept by the payment processor, not the site. Which means, if the site did it right, there would be no way to go from the site's user list to the identity on the payment itself.
Customers initiate disputes with their card issuer. The card issuing bank sends either a request for documentation or a chargeback notice to the payment processor, which forwards them to the seller or service provider. If the seller cannot provide legitimate backup for the charges to the processor, the chargeback is accepted and the seller loses the payment for the sale.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Tuesday July 21 2015, @03:47AM
We could also solve a lot of crime by legalizing rape, murder and robbery. I don't think I need to explain why that logic doesn't work.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday July 21 2015, @11:47PM
False equivalence, but thanks for playing.
The whole point of legalizing prostitution is to try to make sure that the providers are legal, healthy, do consent, pay their taxes, and that the services take place in an environment safe for all (involved or neighbors).
It's been proven to be possible, in many countries (and to a limited screwed-up extent in Nevada)
(Score: 2) by tibman on Monday July 20 2015, @06:20PM
DBAs fear the ON DELETE CASCADE [wikipedia.org]. Just let it happen.. let all the data go free..
It would help if they didn't design every table with at least two foreign keys to the "users" table. LastUpdatedBy, CreatedBy, LastModifiedBy, LastViewedBy, and so on. You try to delete a user and half of the entire system would be wiped out.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 2) by mtrycz on Monday July 20 2015, @07:59PM
Make a logical flag for "deleted" and zero out all account details/posts/events/conversations/whatever for the desired outcome.
It's not rocket science.
In capitalist America, ads view YOU!
(Score: 2) by tibman on Monday July 20 2015, @10:17PM
That is not a better solution because you'll end up with completely useless data still tied up with useful data. You have basically proposed a cascade delete except the data is not actually deleted but set to null or some sane default. You'll probably have odd side effects where validation mechanisms or other business rules will have to ignore these zero'd records as they move through the system. The one big part where this fails is the primary keys for each of these zero'd records still exist. If anyone could associate a user with any key then that could still be used to see who they talked to and when. If anyone quoted your name, for example, that quote would still exist and expose your deleted account. That deleted account still has "meta data" because it is connected to other people's data. Adding a bit flag is the is the easiest solution, but not a good one in this case.
I would agree with you if your solution was for a system that just deactivated accounts and left the details in place. Other people interacting with the system could still see your name and usage history. But this is supposed to be a complete removal with no trace.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 2) by Hartree on Monday July 20 2015, @10:11PM
"DBAs fear the ON DELETE CASCADE"
Real DBAs have duplexed redo logs with archiving (or the equivalent point in time recovery capability), which greatly reduces the fear.
What they really fear is slowly seeding errors into the data over time so that a considerable number of backups as well as the current database are suspect.
(Score: 1, Troll) by archfeld on Monday July 20 2015, @06:44PM
The FBI and the NSA should hunt these FSCK'n douche nozzles down and exert some MAXIMUM justice on them. I'd say deportation to Russia if they are here in the US, or liquidation if they are else where. The time for coddling hackers and blackmailers like these guys has long gone by. How many registered users times $20 makes this an easy felony and it is interstate making it a federal case as well. There is NO ROOM for altruistic hackers in the world anymore, it is a crime and everyone knows it.
For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
(Score: 5, Funny) by morgauxo on Monday July 20 2015, @07:03PM
Sounds like somebody has something to hide doesn't he?
(Score: 1) by Francis on Monday July 20 2015, @07:24PM
They should be punished, because this is illegal. But, the people who will be hurt by this are people that are cheating on their spouses or are the other woman/man that are facilitating it. People that are in open relationships can use just about any dating site they like and generally disclose that fact in their profile when looking for a date.
People go to AM because they're looking to hook up with somebody that's cheating on their spouse or who are interested in cheating on their spouse.
The only people being hurt here are the people who didn't already know their spouse was cheating. I feel somewhat sorry for them, but they probably would have found out eventually anyways. At least this way they can hopefully avoid any further risk of infection.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @08:02PM
That all ignores the social stigma. Lots of people in open relationships can't advertise it too openly lest their community judge them harshly for it. And "get a new community" is not an option for normal people.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @10:15PM
Mod parent up.
Seriously, a woman who is in a stable relationship and knows her spouse cheats may well be fine with it - so long as she doesn't have to overhear it at the grocery store. The problem here is one of marriages of convince being ripped apart. If that's a marriage that's produced children then it's the children who suffer but I'm sure some self-righteous twat on SN will be delighted.
There are many scenarios because every relationship is unique, so let's scream it out:
YOU DO NOT KNOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF OTHER PEOPLES RELATIONSHIPS AND IT'S REALLY NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS!
What is with some of the comments on this story?
(Score: 1) by Francis on Tuesday July 21 2015, @12:18AM
And you think those people are the market for AM? It's a site for people that are looking to cheat on their spouses. You can already create profiles that are pseudonymous on dating websites where the only thing that people can identify is the picture. You don't even have to post a picture if you don't want to.
AM's market is for people that are looking to cheat on their spouses, not people in an open relationship.
Also, this is the 21st century, open-marriages have been known about for at least 50 years in the US, and probably longer elsewhere. If you're living in a community like that, perhaps it's time to move somewhere that has people that are a bit less judgey about things that aren't their business.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @08:49PM
Are you talking about the website or the crackers?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday July 20 2015, @06:54PM
KrebsOnSecurity/KrebsonSecurity or Krebsexcurity is loading really slow.
Don't kid yourself that it is being Soylentdotted. It is being slammed by Washington Post, NPR, and maybe a few of the "37 million" account holders.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Funny) by sjames on Monday July 20 2015, @08:15PM
I wonder if we all listen very carefully if we can finally know the sound of 37 million bricks being shat.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @07:01PM
At least we can be certain that no one reading SN was affected by this. I'm sure none of your moms would allow a high end hooker to hang out with you in the basement. Just sayin'.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @07:05PM
I suspect SN's demographic is 10-15 years older than the other site's. Same gender though.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @07:14PM
on their spouse and now the site has been hacked. Ahhh, revenge is sweet.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Subsentient on Monday July 20 2015, @09:25PM
I seriously contemplated attacking that site multiple times. That's the only one I wanted to really destroy.
No, they didn't do anything to me or anyone I know, but the principle is so abhorrent, I'd like to see their servers melt into black goo.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @09:38PM
Having a site for married cheaters was probably a effective way to remove them from polluting the pool of singles looking for casual hookups.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Tuesday July 21 2015, @03:04AM
how so? they're not encouraging nor enabling cheating. people cheated long before the internet, and people cheat without trolling the internet for dates. its not the site's fault people are cheating, they're at the site because they already decided they're going to cheat. this is just more misdirected rage.
(Score: 2) by penguinoid on Tuesday July 21 2015, @07:50AM
they're not encouraging nor enabling cheating. people cheated long before the internet
I heard they have ads, which would be encouraging. And having a dedicated website is definitely enabling, also encouraging. It's like saying the internet doesn't encourage and enable discussion, because people had discussion before the internet.
RIP Slashdot. Killed by greedy bastards.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by The Archon V2.0 on Monday July 20 2015, @09:52PM
There's not a perfect overlap between cheaters & the AM customer base. AM is a greedy site (I mean, $20 account delete?) and it's less for cheaters and more for skittish people desperate enough to feed the meter constantly. Most of them have something to hide but a few are just plain ol' lonely. Not lying to their spouse about their love life but rather lying to their lover about their married life.
Somewhere right now there's some sap who made an account while single and closed it down after starting a relationship through other means. He is crapping his pants.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 20 2015, @10:24PM
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 21 2015, @06:37AM
Step one is get a user account. You cannot moderate without being logged in... says the AC.
(Score: 2) by Anne Nonymous on Tuesday July 21 2015, @01:12AM
> There's not a perfect overlap between cheaters & the AM customer base.
If you are single, but looking to score with someone married, I'm not sure you're morally off the hook for the cheating part of it. Not that I really care what other people actually do, but that's how I'd see it.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Tuesday July 21 2015, @03:12AM
the way i see it, they're doing the non-cheating partner a favor by showing them that their partner can't be trusted. if i fuck a married woman, its no fault of mine that she cheated because she is the one in whats supposed to be a committed relationship, not me. why should i show some kind of loyalty to her husband? he's just some random stranger to me, i didn't promise to spend my life together with him and only him. no, the only ones at fault are the ones cheating because they're the ones doing all the betraying.
don't take this as me thinking cheating is ok, because i don't, but you have absolutely no reason to be pissed off at anyone except your partner if you get cheated on.
(Score: 2) by penguinoid on Tuesday July 21 2015, @08:03AM
If you commit adultery with another person's spouse, you've still committed adultery. You may not have broken your own vows, but you're still involved. Now maybe they said they weren't married, in which case you didn't intend to commit adultery. Just like, say, if a jealous husband beat you to death maybe he only intended to beat you a little. If it makes you feel any better, in most places you'd be legally in the right.
RIP Slashdot. Killed by greedy bastards.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Tuesday July 21 2015, @02:33PM
no, you have to be married to commit adultery. thats what the word means, "cheating on your spouse". there is no "adultery" if you're not married, you're looking for some other word.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 22 2015, @08:49PM
Is that fear? You will find most people have as much sympathy or empathy for you as you have shown to the person cheated upon. That is a quantity far less than none and it is not misdirected.
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Tuesday July 21 2015, @08:33AM
why should i show some kind of loyalty to her husband?
Same reason you wouldn't cut in front of him in line at a movie theatre, or wipe your snot off on his jacket in a coat room, or any of 1000 other dick moves normal people don't do out of respect for the other people they share the planet with:
Because you're a decent human being instead of a walking piece of shit.
Decent human beings don't knowingly get involved with people in a relationship behind one parties back. It's a douche move.
but you have absolutely no reason to be pissed off at anyone except your partner if you get cheated on.
For sure the cheating partner gets the receiving end a well deserved shit ball; up to including no longer being a partner. But you are woefully mistaken if you think the other party is getting a free pass for a part they knowingly played. They showed the ultimate in disrespect. There's going to be a shit ball with their name on it too.
(Score: 5, Funny) by Darth Turbogeek on Monday July 20 2015, @11:24PM
.... It's all about ethics in the cheating industry
(Score: 2) by Subsentient on Tuesday July 21 2015, @12:44AM
Behehehehehe...
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti